Monstrous, Mortal Embodiment and Last Dances: Frankenstein and the Ballet

  • Carol Margaret Davison
Part of the Studies in Global Science Fiction book series (SGSF)


Following a brief theoretical assessment of the noteworthy points of contact between the body of Frankenstein’s creature and that of the ballet dancer, this chapter delineates how Frankenstein lends itself to exploring corpsoreality—the experience of our body as Other that is precipitated by our awareness, fear, and anxiety about being liable to disease and mortality despite major scientific, medical, and technological advancements and interventions. Contextualised assessments follow of choreographies over the past 30 years by Wayne Eagling, William Forsythe, Rick Darnell, Estefania Miranda, and Liam Scarlett, who have reconfigured the medieval danse macabre and the eighteenth-/nineteenth-century fixation on the ‘good death’ of the Other to focus on this side of the grave, the pains and the pleasures of embodiment, and ‘good’ successful mourning in the face of loss.

Works Cited

  1. Bales, Melanie. 2013. Touchstones of Tradition and Innovation: Pas de deux by Petipa, Balanchine and Forsythe. In Dance on Its Own Terms: Histories and Methodologies, ed. Melanie Bales and Karen Eliot, 175–205. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bewell, Alan. 1989. Wordsworth and the Enlightenment. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bronfen, Elisabeth. 1992. Over Her Dead Body: Death, Femininity and the Aesthetic. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Darnell, Rick. 1991. Brides of Frankenstein. San Francisco: The High-Risk Group.Google Scholar
  5. Edelman, Lee. 2004. No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Eagling, Wayne. 1985. Frankenstein. London: The Royal Ballet.Google Scholar
  7. Forsythe, William. 1986. Die Befragung des Robert Scott [The Questioning of Robert Scott]. Frankfurt: Ballett Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2005. You Made Me a Monster. Frankfurt: The Forsythe Company.Google Scholar
  9. Gere, David. 2004. How to Make Dances in an Epidemic: Tracking Choreography in the Age of AIDS. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  10. Goodwin, Sarah Webster, and Elisabeth Bronfen, eds. 1993. Death and Representation. Baltimore/London: John Hopkins UP.Google Scholar
  11. Groves, Rebecca M. 2012. Dance Review Journal, 44(2): 117–120. Rev. of William Forsythe and the Practice of Choreography: It Starts from Any Point, ed. Stephen, Spier, 2011, London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Haggerty, George E. 2016. What Is Queer About Frankenstein? In The Cambridge Companion to Frankenstein, ed. Andrew Smith, 116–127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jowitt, Deborah. 2003. How Many Ways to Twist it? The Village Voice, October.
  14. ———. 2010. The Beauty and Limits of the Dance World’s Ongoing Love of Virtuosity. The Village Voice, August 11.
  15. Kaplan, Rachel. 1989. Eat That Idiom Spit It Back: The High Risk Group, Julian Theatre at New College, Apr. 23. San Francisco Bay Times, May.Google Scholar
  16. Lindemann, Erich. 1944. Symptomatology and Management of Acute Grief. The American Journal of Psychiatry 101 (2): 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. May, Todd. 2009. Death. Stocksfield: Acumen.Google Scholar
  18. Miranda, Estefania. 2014. Frankenstein, Konzert Theater Bern.
  19. Praz, Mario. 1951. The Romantic Agony. Trans. Davidson, A. London/New York/Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Quigley, Christine. 1996. The Corpse: A History. Jefferson: McFarland and Company.Google Scholar
  21. Scarlett, Liam. 2016. Frankenstein, The Royal Ballet (London) and the San Francisco Ballet.Google Scholar
  22. Shelley, M. 1990. On Ghosts. In The Mary Shelley Reader, ed. B.T. Bennett and C.E. Robinson, 334–340. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Shelley, Mary. 1994. Frankenstein; Or, the Modern Prometheus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Siegmund, Gerald. 2011. Of monsters and Puppets: William Forsythe’s Work After the “Robert Scott Complex”. In William Forsythe and the Practice of Choreography: It Starts from Any Point, ed. Steven Spier, 20–37. New York/Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Solway, Diane. 2007. Is It Dance? Maybe. Political? Sure. The New York Times, February 18.
  26. Spier, Steven. 2011. Introduction: The Practice of Choreography. In William Forsythe and the Practice of Choreography: It Starts from Any Point, ed. Steven Spier, 1–3. New York/Oxford: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Townshend, Dale. 2008. Gothic and the Ghost of Hamlet. In Gothic Shakespeares, ed. John Drakakis and Dale Townshend, 60–97. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Turin, David. 1994. Why Death Rock Won’t Die. L.A. Weekly, January 14–20, pp. 35–36. Database on-line. August 2016.
  29. Wright, Frankie. 1991. The High Risk Dancers Live Up to Name: San Francisco-based Troupe That Will Be at the Sushi Aims to ‘Explode’ Oppression and Exclusion. Los Angeles Times, September 25.
  30. Young, Tricia Henry. 1999. Dancing on Béla Lugosi’s Grave: The Politics and Aesthetics of Gothic Club Dancing. Dance Research: The Journal of the Society for Dance Research 17: 75–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol Margaret Davison
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of English Language, Literature and Creative WritingUniversity of WindsorWindsorCanada

Personalised recommendations